EXCLUSIVE: Jane Levy is in talks to play the lead in the remake of Evil Dead that Fede Alvarez will direct shortly. She replaces Lily Collins, who exited the film recently. Levy is the star of the ABC series Suburgatory, and stars in Fun Size, the Josh Schwartz-directed film for Paramount. In FilmDistrict’s remake of Sam Raimi’s The Evil Dead, Levy’s plays Mia, a character that corresponds to Ash, who was played by Bruce Campbell in the original 1981 movie. Mia is one of five young people who head to the remote cabin where evil awaits. Recovering from a recent overdose, Mia is particularly vulnerable. Raimi, Campbell and Rob Tapert are producing with Ghost House Pictures. Fede Alvarez is directing and co-wrote the script with Rodo Sayagues. Diablo Cody (Juno, Young Adult) revised the latest draft. The movie is targeted to open April 12, 2013. Levy is repped by Gersh, Suskin Management and Robert Offer.

As I've said before, I think the plot sounds good enough for a completely unrelated movie, but it doesn't work as Evil Dead. An Evil Dead movie without Ash is like having an Indiana Jones movies without Indiana Jones, it just doesn't feel right.

Understandable, but as far as I'm concerned Ash didn't really become the star of the series until the second film. He was just the survivor. His character wasn't anything special until "Evil Dead 2" when it ended up just being him and a supporting cast. I'm always down for a new interpretation and as far as Raimi and Campbell's involved I don't see it going wrong. Just as long as the core plot stays the same (teens in a haunted cabin) and deliver the scares I'm content.

Ash was still the main character of the original movie, though. He evolved in Evil Dead II much like how Ripley did in Aliens from the original Alien movie, making the transition from a survivor to a warrior.

__________________Please put down your weapon. You have twenty seconds to comply...

Ash was still the main character of the original movie, though. He evolved in Evil Dead II much like how Ripley did in Aliens from the original Alien movie, making the transition from a survivor to a warrior.

Agreed. Well said. I see the argument being made from a few people and horror websites that Ash wasnt in the first one that much and he isnt the Ash we know until Evil Dead 2. Saying it like he was never even apart of Evil Dead 1 at all. However people wanna argue that, it doesnt take away from him being the main reason why people continue to watch these films everynight and the fact he is the lead in all three films. Im stoked they didnt recast Ash but an Evil Dead film without him will feel wrong.

I'm certainly going to miss seeing Bruce Campbell as Ash, but I also think that Ash's story ended with Army of Darkness. "Hail to the king, baby" is a great note to go out on and I don't know why you'd need to regress Ash's character arc, jump through hoops to get him to a cabin in the woods again, or want to basically repeat what we've seen already.

Especially in a horror franchise it's problematic to bring back the main character again and again. How worried are we supposed to feel about Ash?

The Alien franchise is an example for me of why moving on is a good idea. Aliens pretty much completes Ripley's story leaving them nowhere to really go. Even moreso, Cameron removed a lot of the mystery. I'm excited about Prometheus for the very reason that they seem to be aiming for new ground rather than bringing Sigourney Weaver back again.

Which is not to say that the new Evil Dead will be good. But, the title of the film is The Evil Dead not Ash. I'm willing to give them some leeway to see if something new can be brought to a series that ended a long time ago.

Truth be told, I am looking forward to the film. Diablo Cody is a good screenwriter, and I appreciate how she, as well as the rest of the creative team, have tried to make it more of a horror film than a black comedy, as were the past two films. I think if they change the title of the film, it will mute some of the criticism. The franchise ethics of the fans against the film are very conservative, and that's why Evil Dead, along with a significant number of other horror franchises have grown stagnant. Reinvention is one of the vital components for a franchise to survive.
Now, I am not advocating going for a Halloween 6 route by any means, but I do welcome a new take on the franchise from a solid creative team. Will the film be as revolutionary as the first one? No, but as long as it strives to be good, I think it will fare decently with the general audiences, instead of a bunch of rabid forty year olds still living in their parents' basements.
Then again, there is the chance that I could be wrong, and that the film could turn out to be a waste of ninety minutes. The translation of Cody's material to the screen has been hit or miss: Jennifer's Body, for instance, was a terrific screenplay, but made into an awful film.

I'm certainly going to miss seeing Bruce Campbell as Ash, but I also think that Ash's story ended with Army of Darkness. "Hail to the king, baby" is a great note to go out on and I don't know why you'd need to regress Ash's character arc, jump through hoops to get him to a cabin in the woods again, or want to basically repeat what we've seen already.

Well as I said before, the premise of this movie sounds fine for a stand-alone movie with no connections to Evil Dead at all. But to call it Evil Dead without it's star character is just awkward to me.

__________________Please put down your weapon. You have twenty seconds to comply...

Especially in a horror franchise it's problematic to bring back the main character again and again. How worried are we supposed to feel about Ash?

Not at all, Ash is good at one thing killing deadites. We were told Evil Dead 4 would happen. It didnt. I would have zero problem with Campbell coming back. The guy can still crack the one liners, and an old Ash running into a group of new kids who open the book, sounds entertaining to me.

To me its like Friday the 13th without Jason or NOES without Freddy. Except hes a hero, What sells from that franchise is Ash, what do you have without ash? Not Evil Dead imo.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonathancrane

Truth be told, I am looking forward to the film. Diablo Cody is a good screenwriter, and I appreciate how she, as well as the rest of the creative team, have tried to make it more of a horror film than a black comedy, as were the past two films. I think if they change the title of the film, it will mute some of the criticism. The franchise ethics of the fans against the film are very conservative, and that's why Evil Dead, along with a significant number of other horror franchises have grown stagnant. Reinvention is one of the vital components for a franchise to survive.

I think so too.

Remakes or reboots havnt been going to well for most horror flicks lately. I actually dug Fright Night but living out Peter Vincent would have been bs. Im actually starting to think they maybe should have recasted Ash if they never have any intention of Campbell being back. I would ***** even more for a bit but if this is supposed to be a new franchise I dont wanna see a a number of new Evil Dead sequels without Ash and the humor.

Well as I said before, the premise of this movie sounds fine for a stand-alone movie with no connections to Evil Dead at all. But to call it Evil Dead without it's star character is just awkward to me.

It doesn't to me, because it has the exact same premise as Evil Dead 1 and 2.

I understand wanting to see more Ash, but I think everybody involved, including Bruce Campbell, have moved on.

Not at all, Ash is good at one thing killing deadites. We were told Evil Dead 4 would happen. It didnt. I would have zero problem with Campbell coming back. The guy can still crack the one liners, and an old Ash running into a group of new kids who open the book, sounds entertaining to me.

To me its like Friday the 13th without Jason or NOES without Freddy. Except hes a hero, What sells from that franchise is Ash, what do you have without ash? Not Evil Dead imo.

Cabins in the wood, evil spirits/deadites, and the Necronomicon still remain. The whole premise is intact as originally conceived. Even Army of Darkness didn't get completely away from that.

I think they've got as much mileage out of Ash vs. Deadites as possible, once they returned him to present. I really think you needed Ash vs. Something Else or to throw a new cast of characters vs. the Deadites.

Cabins in the wood, evil spirits/deadites, and the Necronomicon still remain. The whole premise is intact as originally conceived. Even Army of Darkness didn't get completely away from that.

I think they've got as much mileage out of Ash vs. Deadites as possible, once they returned him to present. I really think you needed Ash vs. Something Else or to throw a new cast of characters vs. the Deadites.

I disagree. But we will never know cause ED4 will never happen. Rather see an Evil Dead 4 then this remake for sure. Alot of horror movies nowadays have a Cabins in the wood back drop with something killing teenagers. Its not as original as it was. What other flicks dont have is a strong lead, Ash is too iconic to this series. Deadites arent what sell or why people keep watching.

"With Rodolfo we suffer as anyone when they make a bad remake" said the director with respect to the criteria handled with Sayagués.

Quote:

"We realize the mistakes that we should not make. As fans of the original we know when we are going to offend those who are also fans and when we will not annoy them, but we can not make a movie just for them ".

Quote:

"Especially among fans nobody wants to see a celebrity in a remake like this," he explains.

Quote:

"I rented the movie with a friend in the video store when i was thirteen years and was a serious mistake because we had a very bad time. What I said to Raimi is i want to make the movie I saw in that moment and gave me the more scared in my life. "

I disagree. But we will never know cause ED4 will never happen. Rather see an Evil Dead 4 then this remake for sure. Alot of horror movies nowadays have a Cabins in the wood back drop with something killing teenagers. Its not as original as it was. What other flicks dont have is a strong lead, Ash is too iconic to this series. Deadites arent what sell or why people keep watching.

I agree that Ash is a big deal. But, I made peace that ED4 was never going to happen a long time ago. As well as Ash vs. Freddy & Jason. It's been 19 years since Army of Darkness, I think we can accept that the "franchise", which really never reached more than a cult phenomenom, is dead. There's been a whole generation that's never seen an Evil Dead movie in theaters.

Frankly, I think Raimi and Campbell have accepted that too. They've moved on, fans are still in the denial phase.

But you're never going to replace Bruce Campbell as Ash. That still leaves the basic premise. I have very little problem with a Raimi & Campbell approved Evil Dead movie that features Evil Deadites, a cabin in the woods, reportedly evil trees, and the Necronomicon calling itself Evil Dead. While I'd argue that Ash is iconic, I'd also argue that he isn't the only iconic thing about the Evil Dead movies. Just as Ripley isn't the only iconic thing about the Alien movies.

And, as far as horror franchises go, 19 years is a fairly respectful amount of time. A lot longer than the time between Batman & Robin and Batman Begins. A longer than the time between Halloween series. Or Friday the 13th. Or Nightmare on Elm Street.

I hope its good, Im too much of an Evil Dead fan geek to have full faith in this flick. With Raimi not directing or writing and no campbell as lead or supporting role. Their gonna hae to prove it to me. This film has nothing going for it besides remaking another film from my childhood Id rather not see happen. Just having an idea thats been used before is not gonna sell me. Also imo Aliens are more iconic then deadites, and Prometheus is a prequel Directed by the originals creator. Of course that looks awesome.